14 votes

Are we too stiff?

I agree, sadly. We are trying to regulate what seems hard to get a grasp on in the first place. I too welcome more open and even more opinion based questions. The problem is that when we "open up" we ...
  • 7,055
13 votes

Area51 Proposal: Beginner Graphic Design Stack Exchange (working title)

I hate this idea and downvoted it. Sorry. To try and elaborate I did go back through Ink Spot and read the conversation about this starting roughly https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/...
  • 23k
10 votes
Accepted

Why is this question about Paper Selections 'too broad'?

I think it's an interesting question, and potentially a great question. This is honestly the kind of question we need more of (...I really love paper). I can certainly see how it could be seen as both ...
  • 40k
9 votes

Are we too stiff?

I've changed my stance as of today.... Allow everything and anything regardless of any technical aspect. I can't fathom a site where some of the technical knowledge I feel is invaluable receives close ...
  • 200k
9 votes

Is a new "poor question" close reason needed?

I am in two minds. I share your frustration over really low quality questions lately. But I also think that having too easy close reasons will make us lazy. It will certainly make me lazy, and too ...
  • 10.8k
8 votes
Accepted

How should we handle canonical Q&As?

The tag canonical is somewhat clunky. It’s a meta tag (it’s not about the question's content but about what we think of it) and it’s prone to abuse by askers, possibly resulting in edit wars. I ...
  • 24.6k
7 votes

Is a new "poor question" close reason needed?

We already have ways to interact with this: the downvote button. Firstly, I'm with Bente on this one—I'm afraid that a too-easy close reason will make us really lazy and scare newcomers away ...
  • 24.6k
7 votes

Improving some close reasons

These seem like small, harmless changes that are slight improvements and bring no harm, so I see no reason not to just do this. The first one is definitely an improvement. Linking the word this is, ...
7 votes

Should the opinion-based close reason's description be adjusted for Graphic Design?

I don't see a problem with the wording at all. It doesn't say "All opinions are off-topic". It even begins with "Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience"... ...
  • 40k
7 votes
Accepted

Revisiting closure, part 3.3: Close reason(s) to replace “tech support”

I propose to use two new close reasons: This question does not fall within the expertise of graphic designers. This particularly applies to software and hardware questions that are not specific ...
  • 14.4k
7 votes
Accepted

Closing for "Unclear what you're asking" detrimental to educating new users to our guidelines?

I vote to close as unclear when the question is unclear. It's that simple. I try and refrain from editing for intent. Because, well, I don't know the actual intent, which is why I perceive the ...
  • 200k
6 votes

Idea.... close votes should cost rep

I completely disagree. We want users to clean up the site. Making them give up their reputation to cast a CV makes clean up happen less often. The whole purpose of casting a CV is to say, "Hey, I ...
6 votes

Are we too stiff?

I hate that you asked this, because now I feel like I should write an answer. And posting answers on SE sites is like getting up on a stage in an auditorium packed with the most critical people on ...
  • 1,171
6 votes

Changing how we handle low-effort and tutorial-on-demand questions

In my opinion questions should be closed if: They cannot reasonably answered in this format (or at all). They cannot be reasonably answered by this community. The first case is usually well covered ...
  • 14.4k
6 votes

Revisiting closure, part 2: What are good motivations for closure?

‘Gimme teh codez’ This is a phrase which has been used for many years on StackOverflow especially to refer to questions which show no evidence that the asker has done anything at all to try to arrive ...
6 votes

What are our current policies and guidelines for closing questions?

General rules of thumb Closure is primarily about preventing answers, not about punishing bad or lazy questions (downvotes can do this). Before you vote to close a question, always ask yourself what ...
5 votes

Should old question that are no longer in scope be closed?

In general, yes. If you see something that is no longer on-topic you can vote to close it. Likewise, if you see something closed as off-topic that you think isn't you can vote to reopen it. Now, if ...
  • 23k
5 votes

Revisiting closure, part 1: Preliminaries

Tech support Are we closing too few or too many questions as tech support? How can we define tech support in a better and clearer way? How can we re-phrase the custom close reason for tech support?
5 votes
Accepted

Why is Stack Overflow not one of the options under "close" > "off-topic" > "migration"?

To see something other than Meta in that field, there would have to be a pre-defined migration path. These are rarely used, because: It would require that the close voters of the source site (here: ...
  • 14.4k
5 votes

Font-identification exceptions: identifiers don't work with slight distortions

I don't think we should be making it more complicated when already few follow our guidelines.
  • 23k
5 votes

Font-identification exceptions: identifiers don't work with slight distortions

The main reason why we require using automatic identifiers is to avoid trivial questions where all we do is to feed the asker’s image into an automatic identifier. If the image needs to be rescaled ...
  • 14.4k
5 votes

A review of Critique questions (July 2018)

I think our guidelines do a good job of addressing how to formulate a question so that it's a good fit for the Stack Exchange format. However, I'm wondering if they are good guidelines for "...
  • 8,435
5 votes

New audience-specific texts for our custom close reasons

Does not fulfill requirements for font-identification, style-identification, or critique Close reason: This text is shown when selecting a reason while flagging or voting to close: Does not ...
  • 14.4k
4 votes

Are we too stiff?

Even though I'm the one who suggested the GD Software Support Stack, I have to say I am becoming exhausted of the My Adobe Be Broke (™ @Scott) questions. I don't know what anyone else sees, but ...
4 votes

Idea.... close votes should cost rep

I disagree as well. What should cost rep and not is part of the stack model, which has proved itself adequate over many different sites. Besides the fact that it would hardly be possible to enact this ...
  • 24.6k
4 votes
Accepted

When closing as a duplicate, can one user specify more than a single link?

There is currently no way for this to happen. It used to be the case that moderators could specify more than one duplicate when closing a question (several such questions appear on ELU, and likely on ...
  • 4,339
4 votes

Are we too stiff?

There is a dichotomy here. In my opinion, yes, but I understand one thing. I am new to the forum so I have to respect the intrinsic dynamic of it. But at the same time, it is an open forum and new ...
  • 34.2k
4 votes

Are we too stiff?

Personally, I see the Stack Exchange model as a framework. I don't think it's intended to be a one-size-fits-all solution, but instead a set of broad rules, upon which individual communities can ...
  • 8,328
4 votes
Accepted

Is there need for a third custom off-topic close reason?

There's so much talk these days of what's on topic, and what's off topic. While it would be nice to tell lazy people to go away, that's what we're here for. That's what I'm here for anyways. We ALL ...
  • 23k
4 votes

Changing how we handle low-effort and tutorial-on-demand questions

I think we have two issues: Our close reasons are too similar and open to interpretation People too liberally using Close Vote when a Downvote would suffice In 2015 we got rid of "Brainstorming" as ...
  • 23k

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible